↓ Skip to main content

A Systematic Review of Proximal Neck Dilatation After Endovascular Repair for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Endovascular Therapy, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
A Systematic Review of Proximal Neck Dilatation After Endovascular Repair for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm
Published in
Journal of Endovascular Therapy, October 2016
DOI 10.1177/1526602816673325
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To provide an updated systematic literature review and summarize current evidence on proximal aortic neck dilatation (AND) after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). A review of the English-language medical literature from 1991 to 2015 was conducted using MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify studies reporting AND after EVAR. Studies considered for inclusion and full-text review fulfilled the following criteria: (1) reported AND after EVAR, (2) included at least 5 patients, and (3) provided data on AND quantification. The search identified 26 articles published between 1998 and 2015 that encompassed 9721 patients (median age 71.8 years; 9439 men). AND occurred in 24.6% of patients (95% CI 18.6% to 31.8%) over a period ranging from 15 months to 9 years after EVAR. No significant dilatation of the suprarenal part of the aorta was reported by most studies. The incidence of combined clinical events (endoleak type I, migration, reintervention during follow-up) was higher in the AND group (26%) when compared with 2% in the group without AND (OR 28.7, 95% CI 5.43 to 151.67, p<0.001). AND affects a considerable proportion of EVAR patients and was related to worse clinical outcome, as indicated by increased rates of type I endoleak, migration, and reinterventions. Future studies should focus on a better understanding of the pathophysiology, predictors, and risk factors of AND, which could identify patients who may warrant a different EVAR strategy and/or a closer post-EVAR surveillance strategy.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 74 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 19%
Other 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Student > Master 5 7%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 29 39%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 49%
Engineering 2 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 1%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 32 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 July 2026.
All research outputs
#5,236,670
of 27,265,997 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Endovascular Therapy
#145
of 1,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,327
of 314,364 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Endovascular Therapy
#1
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,265,997 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,240 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 314,364 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.